I am simplifying the vacuum values for simplicity, while keeping asymmetry. I mainly do this because my math is a lot easier. Here are my reasons:
Readers will notice that the vacuum only holds the values -1,0,+2. That is an asymmetry, because (-1+2)/2 = -1/2; which should be the neutral point, instead of zero. A symmetric version would measure (-1,0,+1), all values separated by the same amount.
Two questions, why asymmetry? And how would that happen automatically in the vacuum?
First question. If all waves, at the Pauli rate, had three parts, then -1 means we have captured less than one part,2 means we have capture greater than two parts, and 0 means we have captured 1 or 2 parts, at the smallest level of measurement. This came from economics. The grocery store manager always wants one or two people in line, he has fewer gaps, his cash flow is smoothest. If he habitually allows three or more in line, his cash flow is interrupted by delay, he is always behind. Asymmetry is the best match between phase delay and missing phase.
The vacuum samples are quiescent at phase balance. If phase balance were measure in more refined units, the activity to balance goes by, by a third, I think. How would the vacuum know to do this? Well, lets balance these values (which we may want to do anyway). Let them go as: {-1.5,0,+1.5). There, we have a flip flop, and it is equivalent, but result in a simpler model for the vacuum. It can only measure two values, -3/2 and 3/2. Up and down. Zero is really a reset.
And, readers will notice, it matches our SNR system without conversions.
This gives us the same result, simplifies the math all the way around. But more importantly, it matches an even simpler model of the vacuum, it is a simple flip flop. Further, it is a much better match to the math used in the standard model. And zero remains
It still remains asymmetric, in my definition, because zero has half the precision. Hence, I get closer all the time, and I can nor make a much simpler 'digit' system.
No comments:
Post a Comment